October 7, 2011

In recent weeks, landlords of some pot shops [in California] have received letters from federal prosecutors warning them to stop sales within 45 days or risk seizure of their property and criminal charges....

The current crackdown... is spawning some backlash accusing President Obama of a reversal based on campaign statements, and those later by Justice Department officials, that the federal government shouldn’t and wouldn’t go after medical pot usage allowed by state laws....

Administration officials have countered, such as in this memo in June from Deputy Attorney General James Cole, that the recent aggressive enforcement isn’t a flip-flop — simply a reaction to a vast recent expansion of marijuana cultivation and distribution facilities....

If you tell businesses they can do something, and they rely on it and expand, how can you justify changing the policy because they expanded?

We were just talking about the way uncertainty about government policy inhibits the expansion of business. Now, here's a case where the government proffered assurance about something, triggered a big expansion, and now it's changing the policy.

Why didn't the Obama administration foresee that non-prosecution would lead to expansion? Or maybe I should ask why the purveyors of marijuana trusted the government not to flip the policy? Were they high?

Hey! Wait a minute. Here's some lateral thinking on the subject: All those other businesses owners who are inhibited in the face of policy uncertainty. Let them smoke marijuana. It might overcome their inhibition.

To start with, I do not think that the Obama administration has very good control of any government departments, so that even sections or area offices within the departments are likely to go off on their own.

Second, this is basically how gangster governments operate: Never mind the official policy; you just behave yourself and don't stretch my patience if you know what's good for you!.

Apropos of the currently airing "Prohbition", review of that part of US history (including Justice Stevens' recollections of his father's dealings with Al Capone)shows how crazy the current drug prohibition is. Of course it's not coherent, because its basis is illogical and any legitimate purposes have long ago been corrupted.

There must be something in the water (worse, even, than fouridation)served to government officials, because even candidates who start out with almost rational disdain for the War On Drugs chagne their tunes upon accession to office. (OK, maybe it's not thewater, but Pods.)

Left vs Left.The "hope and change" pot smoking type of liberal against the Leftist fascists of the Obama administration that hate all businesses and seek to have the Federal government control all aspects of what they do. (Except businesses that are on the top donors list..then the only thing the Obamites do is say "how much of this China IOU money can we give your business")

They are looking kind of incoherent on Solyndra too. Today's email dump says Obama fundraiser working at DOE (and who had agreed to recuse himself) continued to press for the Solyndra loan, and said he was getting big pressure from ""WH and OVP."

Lamar63 said...garage mahal said...Guaranteed to piss of every liberal and libertarian in the state, potentially appeasing only a few people who would never vote for him anyway. Well played again, Obama.

===================Yeahhhhhhh!!! Garage returns to 100% lucid form!!

Not just piss off every liberal and libertarian in the state, but every other constituency in every other state with libertarian or liberal "decriminalize pot", "let cancer patients use it if it helps" sort of sentiments.

And with the liberals and live and let live sorts of moderate political leanings - 95% being people that voted for the jug-eared numbnuts.

===============I also see some voters that will flee the Obamites and gravitate to Ron Paul and other states rights people. Romney too, if he is smart - just say he personally opposes recreational drugs and believes the Feds do have a role in blocking importation and sales of hard drugs - but that like healthcare, he believes states are the best place to formulate their own healthcare and vice laws..

As this link (http://tiny.cc/27nbv) shows, Obama has increased the War on Drugs to unprecedented levels. Despite his promise to not go after the medical marijuana clinics, his administration has been busting 'em ever since he got into office.

Nothing will change until people stop voting for the same ol' same ol'. And polls seem to indicate that most people want this policy to change.

Nothing will change until people stop voting for the same ol' same ol'. And polls seem to indicate that most people want this policy to change.

It won't change until all juries revolt and refuse to convict non violent possession cases. No matter their guilt. And it's starting to happen too. The threat of uncooperative juries probably enabled the CA medical pot industry to surivive and expand under the Bush administration.

Seconding what PaddyO said about L.A. It appears that a great many of those "dispensries" are run by gang bangers, who already had the logistics set up. The liberal city government created a monster and now is trying to deal with it.

uh Fraudronius back to trading on Pynchon's name (ie,his character "Tyrone Slothrop"--which book, joto?). TP would not support the crackdown, or the Teabugs, even the glibertarian sorts--ie ,your "sorepaw" BS (nor likely the Obama-Holder policies). So like change your s-name (one of what 20-30??)--say to like "JanetReno" or something more fitting, trash. You don't know fock about the LA pot scene either,Marysville.

The stuff shouldn't be legal in the first place; the whole medical marijuana thing is a scam. The health hazards alone are worse than tobacco.

Hagar said...

To start with, I do not think that the Obama administration has very good control of any government departments, so that even sections or area offices within the departments are likely to go off on their own.

Why didn't the Obama administration foresee that non-prosecution would lead to expansion?

The Obama administration can't forsee anything. Not the effect of their policies on employment, the economy, energy costs, not anything. All they can do is follow hard line left wing ideology and toss in poorly thought out stop gap measures here and there to pretend they're doing something.

edutcher said...The stuff shouldn't be legal in the first place; the whole medical marijuana thing is a scam. The health hazards alone are worse than tobacco.==================State voters cannot determine if they want to decriminalize or criminalize a substance? Only the people in DC in agencies that justify their very existence by keeping things illegal?Should Obama and his minions have the power to control calories and fat in restaurants and make tobacco use as criminal as marijuana?

What power wouldn't you give to the Fed Gov't? That those in DC believe the States use unwisely?

Hey, BATFEIEIO has been doing similar crap for decades. Some 'law' is determined by them- not Congress- and they issue a letter saying "THIS is the law." Then, after people have spent money getting manufacture going, they change their mind and issue a NEW letter that screws everybody who worked by the first one.

I don't see why pot should be illegal and I don't see the political benefit for Obama to go after medical pot.

An approach consistent with federalism is to let California do their thing with medical pot and see how it works out. The other states can check out the results in Cali and decide for themselves whether medical pot works for them.

Legalizing pot would reduce the pressure on mexico a bit from the narco gangsters that are terrorizing Mexico.